SCHIAVO INTERVENTION ENDS

The Hill ^ | 3/23/05

[Cboldt]

Did you know that he didn't have to ask the courts to make the determination but he did?

Now that is a new one on me. A husband can walk into a hospital and order the caregivers to cease care? No evidence of the wishes of the patient are required? Well, man, in that case, Michael is one stupid fellow.

[agrace]

OK, I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night, so please correct me if I'm wrong. This is based on the statute you highlighted, which seems to say federal funding can't be used to withhold nutrition and hydration.

Medicaid/Medicare is a federal program. The hospice in which she resides receives Medicaid/Medicare funding. How then is the feeding tube withdrawal by the hospice not a violation of federal law?

[steenkeenbadges]

"admitted they knew Terri was PVS."

The nurse didn't think so. I'm certainly not suggesting that doctors would ever be lying maniplators.

[Cathy]

You are correct - they assumed that Fed courts would not act and the maintained their integrity amongst their ACLU and NOW constituency.

Devilishly clever.

[Sunsong]

Thanks a lot. I'll keep asking - perhaps someone will see one of my posts.

[agrace]

Did you know that court documents show that Terri's doctors recommended Michael pull the tube in '93?

Never heard that before. Could you link?

[McGavin999]

Not true. The first thing we should do is make sure that the judiciary is cleaned up. Congress holds the purse strings and oversight. The first thing they should do is slash the budget for the judiciary, and I mean make it HURT. Then they should start by breaking up the 9th Circut and let it be known that they won't be stopping there.

It is past time that the judiciary be reminded that that they are only ONE branch of government, not the only branch that counts. As a matter of fact, they are the lesser of the three branches.

[Tall_Texan]

Were they married in the Catholic Church? Could the Church annul the marriage, and would that, taken along with the fact of his second relationship, present some legal argument for divorce, thus ending his control over her?

Interesting points. I would presume the Schindlers have already thought of this and it's probably too late to help Terri even if it could be done.

[frogjerk]

I will always err on the side of personal liberty.

I've got a question:

Why does the word LIFE come before LIBERTY in the Declaration of Independence and in the Amendments to the Constitution?

[edeal]

i'm not in the mood to fight with you over this, but i can only relay what i have observed. the libertarians i have known and listened to seem to be concerned with keeping their taxes down and saving money rather than saving people. i know that sounds harsh, but this is my impression of libertarians. they seem to be people obsessed with their personal freedom regardless of the effects of such freedom upon the general society, and unconcerned about general social policies except how it affects their wallet and their ability to make a buck. sorry if that offends you, and perhaps i am wrong. but i've seen a lot of that, and my opinion of libertarians is - obviously - pretty negative.

My issue is that I fear the governement and the people as a collective much more than individuals.

[oceanview]

I am surprised at that, because I am with from the NY metro area every day - and I am getting a different vibe from them about how they feel on this story. If the "Bible Belt" people as you refer to them, want this woman to be starved, I am not sure how to read that.

And that law you site is actually a good one - a spouse should be able to have their guardianship over their mate stripped in certain conditions, would we want a father who had sexually abused his daughter to be allowed to be her health care proxy? I certainly would not want my wife pulling the plug on me if she were shacked up with another guy while we were still legally married.

[expatguy]

...but I believe this matter now belongs in the hands of the judiciary.

The matter is in all of our hands - collectively

Terri needs water.

An American Expat in Southeast Asia

[Cboldt]

Read the opinion of the court and in particular, their reference to Frist's comments on this subject. It seems clear that Frist believes that the court is not required to do a de novo review if they don't think it is necessary.

Frist's comments in this regard had to do with mandating the court to issue an injuction, direct order to insert the feeding tube. The court said no injunction, and they are right, the statute and plain discussion on the floor of the Senate agrees with the contention that they weren't directly ordered to issue an injunction.

The court is still thumbing its nose at Congress. The dissent in the 11th circuit got it right. But, it's the dissent, i.e., just so much hot air. The law says "Starve her, that's what she wants."

[Peach]

Yes, a husband can do exactly that. If the hospital is uncertain they will consult with attorneys.

It happens every day in this country. My stepdad had the plug pulled for his daughter 4 years ago. She lived out of state, the doctors didn't know my stepdad, but since there was no hope (as in the Terri case when they recommended Michael pull the tube), the complied with my step-father's wishes.

And the court noted he didn't have to do what he did. Those are their words, btw, not mine. It's in their court documents.

[BikerNYC]

DeLay went further, saying, . . .

“Section three requires the judge to grant a temporary restraining order because he cannot fulfill his or her recognized duty to review the case de novo without first keeping Terri Schiavo alive.”

He's full of crap. Section Three of the law states:

After a determination of the merits of a suit brought under this Act, the District Court shall issue such declaratory and injunctive relief as may be necessary to protect the rights of Theresa Marie Schiavo under the Constitution and laws of the United States relating to the withholding or withdrawal of food, fluids, or medical treatment necessary to sustain her life.

If Congress wanted to give the court some extraordinary jurisdiction to grant a preliminary injunction outside of the ordinary rules for granting one before a determination of the merits, it could have put that in the law.

[PsyOps]

Make another sign that has the Republican also.... they are no better.

If they (including the President) can't save one poor woman, then they are worthless. I have always been a republican, but those days are over if Terry dies due to starvation. I won't vote democrat, but I sure as he## won't vote republican again.

Cheers,

[Nowhere Man]

The Republicans SHOULD HAVE SPENT ALL their political capital to save Terri. Terri's death will hurt them in 2006 & 2008. Bush won Ohio because the Conservative base came out. Now if the Republicans can't defend Terri's life, why vote for them.

If I was Dubya, you'd be hearing the drones of C-130's over the hospice with paratroopers coming down. Sigh..... THere are times I feel politically homeless, well the Democrat are self explanitory but between the Republicans supporting the bankruptcy reform and the inaction from W and his brother on Terri, I really can't be certain on the Republicans either. This is a poison pill to be sure.

[AlbionGirl]

Well, maybe this was for naught and maybe it wasn't. Maybe they were merely grandstanding, and maybe they weren't. But, there isn't any doubt that the judiciary rules with a velvet glove filled with lead, and that Congress and the Executive branch possess absolutely no ability to protect us from this progressive departure from absolute values governing our Nation.

Most of us have never wanted for anything, and as a consequence life is much less revered. A smart shopping mentality permeates all.

[michigander]

which seems to say federal funding can't be used to withhold nutrition and hydration.

No. It seems to say that even if federal funding is being used, they don't care if nutrition and hydration is withheld.